Speculation: 2023-24-25 Sharks Roster Discussion

[Barrie22]

Why? Thornton is the worst playoff player since Marcel Dionne. That's an absolute anchor on your team every postseason.

Only from fools like you that think a single player can lead teams to a Cup. Gretzky couldn't do it, so what makes you think Thornton should be able to?

 

[OrrNumber4]

Only from fools like you that think a single player can lead teams to a Cup. Gretzky couldn't do it, so what makes you think Thornton should be able to?

My point isn't that Thornton should have been able to win the Sharks a cup single-handedly, my point is that Thornton did not play like a franchise-caliber player in the playoffs. With him as the core, the team built around him would have needed to have been exceptional (see Stamkos in Tampa Bay) in order for the Sharks to win.

Put another way, the only way prime Thornton could have won a cup was by being the #3/4/5 guy on his team, but the Sharks thought he could be the #1 guy.

 

[Barrie22]

Thornton in his prime 2005-06/2013-14, thornton was 9th in playoff scoring, while playing the 4th least amount of games in that time period.

Known so called playoff masters toews, Bergeron, Kopitar were all below him.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Thornton in his prime 2005-06/2013-14, thornton was 9th in playoff scoring, while playing the 4th least amount of games in that time period.

Known so called playoff masters toews, Bergeron, Kopitar were all below him.

This is such a terrible argument.

Adjusting for games played, he's 22nd in scoring (filtering for players playing more than 20 games). 3rd worst in the league for +/-.

As a comparison, in the RS he's fifth overall in scoring and 5th in +/-.

And, if you look at percentiles instead of raw numbers, it's going to be skewed even more.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

My point isn't that Thornton should have been able to win the Sharks a cup single-handedly, my point is that Thornton did not play like a franchise-caliber player in the playoffs. With him as the core, the team built around him would have needed to have been exceptional (see Stamkos in Tampa Bay) in order for the Sharks to win.

Put another way, the only way prime Thornton could have won a cup was by being the #3/4/5 guy on his team, but the Sharks thought he could be the #1 guy.

Considering worse #1's have won a Cup, I'm not inclined to agree with this point. I think they could've won with him being the guy if there was a second guy that could control the game like Thornton could. As much as guys like Marleau, Boyle, Pavs, Couture, or Burns are great players, they don't control games like Thornton did or were gamebreakers in a similar manner during Thornton's prime. The closest we got to someone like that was Burns' Norris season but by then Thornton was already declining and not as capable of continuing the things he was great at with respect to controlling game flow.

 

[Grinner]

Thornton was playing with leg injuries in some of those latter play off appearances.
He was a liability, but it Joe Thornton.

 

[Juxtaposer]

The idea that the Sharks would have won a Cup without Joe Thornton is insane. Thornton was the only reason we even made the playoffs half the time, I’m being fully serious.

I would still do the Thornton trade all over again, even knowing we still wouldn’t have won a Cup 20 years later, over the alternate timeline of the Sharks being a mediocre bubble team for 15 years without him under the delusional belief that Wilson would have somehow acquired a better, non-choker, franchise #1C.

I agree that Thornton had mostly sub-par playoff runs. Still would do the deal.

 

[OrrNumber4]

The idea that the Sharks would have won a Cup without Joe Thornton is insane. Thornton was the only reason we even made the playoffs half the time, I’m being fully serious.

I would still do the Thornton trade all over again, even knowing we still wouldn’t have won a Cup 20 years later, over the alternate timeline of the Sharks being a mediocre bubble team for 15 years without him under the delusional belief that Wilson would have somehow acquired a better, non-choker, franchise #1C.

Agreed that Thornton was instrumental in making the playoffs. But maybe the path the Sharks are on without Thornton leads to them actually having a championship-winning team. After all, that's the goal.

 

[Cas]

Agreed that Thornton was instrumental in making the playoffs. But maybe the path the Sharks are on without Thornton leads to them actually having a championship-winning team. After all, that's the goal.

Alternatively, the path leads to #1C Mikael Granlund and a bunch of 6th place finishes.

 

[hohosaregood]

The only "benefit" I can think of is an alternate Thornton-less timeline is that DW probably doesn't last past 2010 as the GM. And who knows where this franchise would even be on the NHL landscape. We could have easily been as low as Buffalo.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Alternatively, the path leads to #1C Mikael Granlund and a bunch of 6th place finishes.

I mean, without Thornton, they're a basement team. They get lottery picks, they trade off players for futures, etc. Not inconceivable that they draft Toews/Kane/Doughty/Hedman (just in 2007 they have 2 extra first-round-picks). Maybe they can sign someone like Chara...

 

[Alaskanice]

I mean, without Thornton, they're a basement team. They get lottery picks, they trade off players for futures, etc. Not inconceivable that they draft Toews/Kane/Doughty/Hedman (just in 2007 they have 2 extra first-round-picks). Maybe they can sign someone like Chara...

You use “maybe” a bit. I’m not going to base my decisions of what might have been.

 

[matt trick]

I've come to agree that Thornton's drop off in playoff performance was a critical limiting factor to the teams success. I also think making other better moves could have been the difference maker in winning the cup. I think Pavs, Hertl, Burns, Couture and to lesser degree Marleau (as much as it pains me to say) in the playoffs were good enough running mates. However, it would have required overwhelming depth that the team never had- like those cap circumventing hawks teams with Hossa and Keith making $10M combined.

Wilson was a solid GM- until the last few years when loyalty and declining performance got him in trouble. However, he was wasteful, lots of high picks in lesser years that could have developed into cheap talent, along with mulitple bottom of the line-up players eating $5-10M in incremental cap space for non improvement level players.

 

[STL Shark]

My point isn't that Thornton should have been able to win the Sharks a cup single-handedly, my point is that Thornton did not play like a franchise-caliber player in the playoffs. With him as the core, the team built around him would have needed to have been exceptional (see Stamkos in Tampa Bay) in order for the Sharks to win.

Put another way, the only way prime Thornton could have won a cup was by being the #3/4/5 guy on his team, but the Sharks thought he could be the #1 guy.

He put up roundabout the same playoff point totals per game (+/-.05 PPG) as Datsyuk, Kopitar, and Toews who were the 1C's of 6 Stanley Cup Champs during the "prime Thornton" era and likely his fairest comps (i.e. not using Crosby who is just better than everyone). Issue is SJ didn't have an elite defense and/or goaltending like those teams (along with the lack of depth to be anything other than a 2 line team).

 

[Hodge]

The problem with Jumbo is that he went from around a point per game in the regular season to 0.8 points per game in the playoffs during his Sharks career. The discrepancy was even starker during his peak from say 2006-2010. What good is having a dominant 1C if he doesn't perform it like when the games actually matter?

Of course I don't begrudge Jumbo for this. As always DW's incompetence was to blame. He could have recognized Jumbo was never going to get it done and traded him or built actual scoring depth underneath Thornton to help compensate for the dropoff in production. He did neither.

 

[Saskatoon]

It is also a bite of shame that the Sharks team that did make the cup finals ran up against one the best teams of the era the Eastern Conference sent to the finals.

Say the Sharks play the 2014 New York Rangers - they may have won a cup and then all of these discussions would likely not be happening.

 

[Barrie22]

It is also a bite of shame that the Sharks team that did make the cup finals ran up against one the best teams of the era the Eastern Conference sent to the finals.

Say the Sharks play the 2014 New York Rangers - they may have won a cup and then all of these discussions would likely not be happening.

I still think the series would of been closer without the coaching staff changing up the lineup from what was working to whatever they were thinking with putting the most useless defensive pairing with the Thornton line. The Thornton line with burns and vlasic on the backend worked like a charm for the 1st 3 rounds.

 

[STL Shark]

The problem with Jumbo is that he went from around a point per game in the regular season to 0.8 points per game in the playoffs during his Sharks career. The discrepancy was even starker during his peak from say 2006-2010. What good is having a dominant 1C if he doesn't perform it like when the games actually matter?

Of course I don't begrudge Jumbo for this. As always DW's incompetence was to blame. He could have recognized Jumbo was never going to get it done and traded him or built actual scoring depth underneath Thornton to help compensate for the dropoff in production. He did neither.

This implies that there isn't a difference between playoff hockey and an 82 game regular season (which is just inherently false). The "slide" from Jumbo's numbers are within the same standard deviation that you see from everyone else that is a top center from regular season to playoffs in that era (i.e. the era where you could clutch and grab and grind the game to a screeching halt in the playoffs with no whistles from the refs).

From 2006-2016 (take out the last 2 playoffs in SJ where he played on a torn ACL against Edmonton and 2019 where he was a 3C getting 3C minutes), he was 0.85 PPG in the playoffs with literally only 1 season under 0.8 (the 2013-14 year where he was just legit bad in the infamous reverse sweep series). Jumbo wasn't the problem, the lack of supporting cast was the problem.

 

[gaucholoco3]

From 2006-2016 (take out the last 2 playoffs in SJ where he played on a torn ACL against Edmonton and 2019 where he was a 3C getting 3C minutes), he was 0.85 PPG in the playoffs with literally only 1 season under 0.8 (the 2013-14 year where he was just legit bad in the infamous reverse sweep series). Jumbo wasn't the problem, the lack of supporting cast was the problem.

This exactly. Should he have not played that year to “save” his playoff stats so he looks better. Or should he be the warrior that he was playing through it and being an effective 3C.

Jumbo never won a cup because of luck. The Sharks either got nightmare matchups in years they had the depth, or they never were able to combine good goaltending with strong play from the skaters. There were years the goalies were lights out but those were the years the skaters fell flat. The years the skaters played lights out the goalies fell on their face.

Under today’s referee standards the goal in game 6 would have been disallowed and no reverse sweep happens. The Sharks would have cruised through the rest of the playoffs as the Kings had one of the easiest playoff schedules ever that year.

Winning the Stanley Cup is the hardest major sports trophy to win and takes an incredible amount of luck.

 

[Herschel]

Winning the Stanley Cup is the hardest major sports trophy to win and takes an incredible amount of luck.

One of the truest and yet hardest statements for fans to grasp.

 

[Jargon]

Joe Thornton made the Sharks a team to watch, he gave us years and years of amazing runs and amazing hockey. "If we didn't get Thornton we could've drafted someone who might have been good though!" is a wild argument considering that Joe Thornton was a *generational Hall of Fame player*.

I would do that trade over and over and over again.

That said, while @Hodge's DW hate is pathological, I do agree that the biggest issue with all those runs is that DW was terrible at building a bottom six. All teams had to do was cut off Joe's passes and double- / triple- team him and they could shut him down. What we needed was a third line that could win a game, or a fourth line that completely outmatched the other fourth line to pot in a timely goal or two. I don't think we've ever had that? For most of those years, our defense was pretty unbalanced too.

I think DW really struggled to build a balanced team. I also think they had some bad luck on some of their best runs.

Anyway, #noregrets, we should all feel lucky that we had the pleasure of watching Joe f***ing Thornton through the prime of his career, are you kidding me?!

 

[Hodge]

This implies that there isn't a difference between playoff hockey and an 82 game regular season (which is just inherently false). The "slide" from Jumbo's numbers are within the same standard deviation that you see from everyone else that is a top center from regular season to playoffs in that era (i.e. the era where you could clutch and grab and grind the game to a screeching halt in the playoffs with no whistles from the refs).

From 2006-2016 (take out the last 2 playoffs in SJ where he played on a torn ACL against Edmonton and 2019 where he was a 3C getting 3C minutes), he was 0.85 PPG in the playoffs with literally only 1 season under 0.8 (the 2013-14 year where he was just legit bad in the infamous reverse sweep series). Jumbo wasn't the problem, the lack of supporting cast was the problem.

According to this article, scoring goes down by an average of 4.4% in the playoffs compared to the regular season. Thornton's scoring consistently went down by over 20%. Using the years you cite, Thornton averaged 1.06 points per regular season game from 2006-2016 which dropped to 0.85 points per playoff game: a 20% dropoff.

It's inaccurate to suggest Thornton's dropoff is in line with the average player let alone other superstars. There are many factors that could have caused this, including just plain bad luck, but regardless when your most important offensive player loses 5 times as much of his offense in the playoffs as the average player does you're not going to win the Cup.

 

[OrrNumber4]

He put up roundabout the same playoff point totals per game (+/-.05 PPG) as Datsyuk, Kopitar, and Toews who were the 1C's of 6 Stanley Cup Champs during the "prime Thornton" era and likely his fairest comps (i.e. not using Crosby who is just better than everyone). Issue is SJ didn't have an elite defense and/or goaltending like those teams (along with the lack of depth to be anything other than a 2 line team).

Even if that is the case, those three were some of the best all-around, two-way players in the game's history. Thornton, at least in the regular season, was a scoring phenom.

This implies that there isn't a difference between playoff hockey and an 82 game regular season (which is just inherently false). The "slide" from Jumbo's numbers are within the same standard deviation that you see from everyone else that is a top center from regular season to playoffs in that era (i.e. the era where you could clutch and grab and grind the game to a screeching halt in the playoffs with no whistles from the refs).

No, this is completely inaccurate and has been debunked half a hundred times. Scoring drops roughly 5% between the season and playoffs.

 

[Alaskanice]

I was watching the broadcast, when we learned that Brad Stuart, Marco Sturm and Wayne Primeau had been scratched.
Not much was said about it until Randy broke the news to fans, Joe Thornton was a Shark. I was running about the house cheering. I had no idea of how much it would bear on this team I love.
Pavelski will always be my favorite Shark because he overcame so much. Jumbo made San Jose a powerhouse for many years. He legitimized a team that needed it. No one will ever tarnish how much I cherish that Joe Thornton was and remains the best Sharks player ever.

 

[STL Shark]

Even if that is the case, those three were some of the best all-around, two-way players in the game's history. Thornton, at least in the regular season, was a scoring phenom.


No, this is completely inaccurate and has been debunked half a hundred times. Scoring drops roughly 5% between the season and playoffs.

Got it. So we can call Crosby a playoff choker then because he's 10.5% lower from regular season to playoff scoring in terms of PPG even though he has 3 Cups. Why have a 1C when they don't play as well come playoff time and all the superlative BS that gets spewed about Thornton.